Text Size

Clinton reinforced his analysis when she said, “We condemn in the strongest terms this senseless act of violence.”

This concept of “senseless violence” is at the heart of the left’s refusal to confront the reality of radical Islamists.

These are not acts of senseless violence.

These are acts of war.

Our ambassador to Libya and three other Americans were not killed by a senseless mob. They were killed by a purposeful group of men armed with sophisticated weapons. These killers had tracked Ambassador Chris Stevens down to the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, where he was much more vulnerable to attack and had less protection. They waged a coordinated, military-style assault.

Our four dead are combat casualties as much as anyone in Iraq or Afghanistan.

It is tragic that the president is so committed to a leftist worldview that he cannot allow himself to face these facts.

It is inconceivable that there just happened to be attacks in Egypt and Libya on Sept. 11. Yet when I connected the dots between the two countries on TV yesterday morning, the reporter asked me if I had inside knowledge. It had clearly not occurred to them that simultaneous attacks on embassies were almost certainly not coincidental.

No one has looked into how the news of this stupid film reached crowds in Egypt and Libya. Similarly, a few years ago, no one wanted to look at how anger about Danish cartoons spread across the Muslim world.

The left is desperate to deal with each new incident as though it is occurring in isolation.

This morning people were asking how we had failed the Libyan people. The naïveté is unending.

Libya was the second largest source of anti-U.S. fighters in Iraq. (First was our “ally” Saudi Arabia.) Benghazi was the largest supplier of anti-American fighters from Libya.

Because of congressionally-imposed limitations and administrative and bureaucratic timidity, the fact is we know remarkably little about our enemies.

We should expect to be surprised because our elites cling to a fiction of “peace” while our enemies are waging war.

The policies of Obama have made our intellectual incoherence and strategic incompetence even worse.

It is no accident that the embassy in Cairo issued a groveling statement, apologizing to the haters for having inconvenienced them with American freedom of speech.

The embassy was simply following Clinton’s lead, set months earlier in her meetings with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.

The OIC has a long- term campaign to manipulate the U.S. government into defining any criticism or improper reference to Islam as unacceptable.

No one should be confused by this. As Andy McCarthy wrote yesterday, the Islamist definition of heresy would destroy American free speech.

The Obama administration is waging war on the Catholic Church while appeasing the most extreme elements of Islam.

Readers' Comments (339)

Obama and Hillary by Obama's own admission have lost Egypt as an ally and have awakened the Islamic nations in the Middle East by bankrolling the Muslim Thomas Jefferson's (your charactrization not mine) "democracy" movement. What damnable fools YOU ARE!

9/11 came and OUR OWN government threw us under the bus and took away our 4th amendment rights and now the TSA is expanding AND WE agree to this BULLCRAP?

A bunch of Mohammed worshiping zombies in Libya attack our embassy, kill our Ambassador and three others and Hillary and Obama's first inclination is to side with Islamists who just attacked us and attack our rights under the 1st Amendment.

Newt babbles, "The Obama administration is waging war on the Catholic Church while appeasing the most extreme elements of Islam."

The Republican Party actually considered this crazy man as a viable candidate for President. Almost un unbelieveable...if it weren't for the others on the crazy bus: Bachman...Cain...Santorum...Trump...

And by the way, remember who destroyed the concept and practice of "loyal opposition" in America.? That's right; angry, nutty Newt.

I confess that I find it disturbing to be in a state of agreement with Newt Gingrich. He is, to me, a most distasteful and unlikeable public figure, even though I consider myself a hard libertarian. But truth is truth. What he says about the declaration of war on the Roman Catholic Church vs appeasement of Islamic circles is the truth.

I disagree a bit on the details here, but not the sentiment. I view this not as casualties of war but victims of a terrorist attack. These 4 9/11/2012 deaths are no different than the 2,977 people who died on the 9/11 attack of 2001. It was a terrorist attack on our foreign US soil on the anniversary. Classifying it an act of an ongoing war and these deaths as combat casualties minimizes the outrage we should all feel. The outrage over the attack,; the outrage over the loss of dear public servants and the men who tried to protect them; the outrage over the host country's lack of security and response; the outrage over the negligent US security in the embassies and consulates in these dangerous countries; the outrage over the fact it took this President 18 hours to even say anything; the outrage that campaigning is more important than protecting or informing the American people; the outrage - that there is no outrage. These last 48 hours have made me sad for a lot of reasons, but I am really sad that we have no leadership. We are a rudderless country with a President that might as well go play golf.

Not only does this article wildly go off tangent, it's basically asking Americans to let neoconservatives run the country again. Brilliant idea Newt. Why don't we just reelect GWB again? Oh wait, he didn't go to your convention...

Amazing how chameleon-like teabaggers can be when there are political points to be scored. All of a sudden they want to plant a big wet tongue kiss on the very government employees they despised four days ago. Hell, I'm guessing they were all union members, to boot!

When we attacked Afghanistan we had a specific military organization in mind, the Taliban. As far as we know, these attacks were NOT committed by any country's military, (though this may change later), but appears to have been the act of a terrorist or non-affiliated military type organization.

So the question is, who exactly do we declare war on? Libya's democratically elected government? Egypt's government? Cairo's? Who exactly is our enemy here that our military needs to target?

I'll keep this simple; President Obama did more for the honour of America when he came into office than we could have hoped after eight psychotic years of Bush. President Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Now he must earn it, again! If dialing down language to avoid another war we clearly cannot afford, deficits remember?, is considered the conservative action under these "acts of war", why aren't the "conservatives" of America pleased? The only thing that scares me about liberals is our absolute distaste of violence, and our unwillingness to participate in violence; thus, violence is their tool against us. It's a sticky wicket!

"Senseless" does not imply "unorganized" or "spontaneous." It means that these acts are stupid, foolish, and barbaric. We already know terrorist organizations have been waging "war" on the U.S. for decades. Pushing the country toward another full-scale war with ANY country is ridiculous and, more than anything, SENSELESS!

We can be assured by informed critical thinking that indeed; these ungovernable and ungoverning Right Wing re-Publicans in America will go to any length to destroy President Obama as a Man and a President. After all, how dare he think he can join in with the "Old Boys Club"! Keep in mind; they really are planning on making us be happy with a pittance for our labors!

There is a difference between a "coordinated military-style assault," and state sponsored actions of a military organization.

There can be no war on terror. Terror is an emotion- a natural phenomena. Terror can never be beaten, and I suspect you are smart enough to understand that in attempting to defeat terror you in fact become a terror to alot of people.

I'm not sure what the point of all of this unsubstantiated rhetoric is- oh wait, its probably to drum up votes from understandably outraged moderates vulnerable to the demagoguery of war.

Let's ask Osama bin Laden or Anwar-al-Awlaki if the U.S. has appeased Islamic radicals. This president is a terrorist killing machine and he has taken great measures to nearly obliterate the entire al-qaeda infrastructure. The attack in Libya was from a very small group of extremists, and yet Mr. Gingrich calls for war. War against whom? The Libyan governement who is an ally, and arrested suspects related to the attack.? The Libyan people, who still vastly support the U.S. and died trying to save Ambassador Stevens?

The President is already fighting a war against what's left of al-qaeda, and we're winning. Let Mr. Gingrich chase his windmills.

Angry mobs attacked U.S. Diplomatic buildings in Egypt and Libya, desecrated our flags and replaced them with flags that say 'There is No God but Allah', and killed four Americans on the anniversary of 9/11. The very word "protesters" as reported by the Associated Press is misleading. Protesters hold demonstrations and signs. These people had weapons and shoulder-fired rockets and murdered a U.S. ambassador and 3 other American citizens. That makes them armed enemy combatants. Interesting too to note that the marines who guard our embassies are not allowed to carry live ammunition.

Obama's tough campaign talk must have our enemies shaking in their boots, especially since he has reduced our nuclear arsenal down to an unacceptable minimum. But then I guess I should be reassured after Obama's spokesperson told us this morning that, "Obama is the most sophisticated consumer of intelligence information on the planet so he does not have to attend daily security briefings." Hard to do that after Obama, also this morning, said that "Egypt is not an ally, or an enemy." Egypt must be wondering, 'what the f___' since they've been our ally since 1989. Most sophisticated consumer of intelligence information on the planet, huh. Yeah, right.

This is a great article, depicting the absolute truth and belief of obama. Many including mysel absolutely feel obama is backing the Muslim Brotherhood. He will not act against them. He might have an investigation to arrest a few but just a trivial effort only. If he were indeed a true American President he would have demanded to know why the siege wasn't stopped quickly and was allowed to continue until the US ambassador and three others were murdered.

The fact that attacks were carried out in other countries as well absolutely qualifies the planned murders as an act of war. If these heathen Satanic Muslims want war let them have it with not holds barred. Then maybe their leaders would recognize that any act against the US will be punished. obama not excluded